Judges Can't Be Vilified By Unhealthy Criticism: Kerala HC In Plea Seeking Contempt Action Against CPM's P Jayarajan Over Facebook Post
The Kerala High Court today disposed of a plea filed over allegedly "derogatory" Facebook post made by CPI(M) Leader P Jayarajan in relation to the proceedings emanating from an attack on the leader in 1999.Upset with the manner in which his case was dealt with by the single judge, Jayarajan purportedly said people should react against such "worms" in the judiciary.Petitioner N Prakash...
The Kerala High Court today disposed of a plea filed over allegedly "derogatory" Facebook post made by CPI(M) Leader P Jayarajan in relation to the proceedings emanating from an attack on the leader in 1999.
Upset with the manner in which his case was dealt with by the single judge, Jayarajan purportedly said people should react against such "worms" in the judiciary.
Petitioner N Prakash sought directions to the Registrar General to place the information regarding the allegedly offensive Facebook post before the Chief Justice as per Rule 7 of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1971. Rule 7 deals with the initiation of suo moto proceedings of contempt on information.
Justice Devan Ramachandran said it is for the Registrar General to take action and a judicial order need not be issued.
“There can be little doubt that the Registrar General is vested with certain powers under the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1971 and this Court feels and finds no reason to believe that he would not exercise it as per law taking note of all relevant and germane aspects. In such perspective, I do not think that this court is to direct the Registrar General to act in a particular manner because it is up to him statutorily to take action as per the legislative scheme. In the afore circumstances, I close this writ petition, however, leaving full liberty to the petitioner to move before the Registrar General appropriately for which purpose all contentions are also left open”, stated the Court.
It opined that the Court was open to criticism and stated that criticism means that judges are doing some good work.“This seat cannot be vilified by people of this nature”, orally said the Court.
It further stated that healthy criticisms do not bother the judiciary and that the judges are not bothered by such criticisms. It further remarked that unhealthy criticisms against judges would only portray the culture of the person making such comments. It said orally: “I am saying generally, when people use abusive language, unhealthy criticisms, it is their culture that is being shown”.
The Court remarked that people who have a computer or mobile phone making such unhealthy criticisms think that they are doing everything in secrecy and stated that the Constitution and the system guarantee protection to citizens against such abusive comments. It enquired orally to the petitioner, “…the foundational ethos of the Constitution protects us so brilliantly, why are you worried?”
Background
The petitioner was aggrieved by the publication of an allegedly offensive, malicious and derogatory Facebook post, dated March 01, 2024, by P Jayarajan against a judge of the Kerala High Court. The petitioner alleged that the Facebook post scandalizes the authority of the Hon'ble High Court and also obstructs the administration of justice. The plea said: “In a society governed by rule of law, law is supreme and law is above all people and calling the learned singe judge as 'worm' cannot at all be countenanced in any event.”
The petitioner submitted that he had sent a mail to the Registrar General to bring his attention over the impugned Facebook post for initiating a contempt of court action against Jayarajan. The petitioner contended that he intends to prevent mudslinging of the judiciary and aims to protect the high esteem of the judiciary.
The petitioner appeared party in person.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 188
Case Title: N Prakash v P Jayarajan and Anr.
Case no.: WP (C) No. 11034/ 2024